Best Worflow for join components after circular pattern

[janus2]

Hello!

For example, if I have a circular hole pattern with 10 holes. Now I have to position 10 cylinders in these holes. These should rotate.

Therefore I position the 1st cylinder by revolute join.
Then I make a circular pattern for the other 9 cylinders.
Now I must define further 9 Joins.
But I have to move each cylinder away, otherwise I can't see the exact reference points for the join. (Not a simple hole but it has fine steps inside)
Then I have 9 unnecessary moves in the timeline. Now I have to delete them manually. Is there a simpler workflow?
Special regarding the unnecessary moves?

Jan

[davebYYPCU]

No need to move before jointing, Design dependent, you can use As Built Joint, or hide the Components while selecting the other.

Might help....

[MichaelT_123]

Hi Mr Jan,

... without political correctness ... you are asking questions that should be obvious to most who have had done their homework reading/watching F360 reference documentation/tutorials. 

The workflow would be:

• Have a KitKat
• Stop ‘designing’ for some time
• Study documentation
• Have PrincePolo
• Go to a sweet (no more bitter) design process

Regards

MichaelT

[janus2]

As Built Joint is not a option,  because it is a revolute join.

Change visibility is a option, OK. But if the placement situation is critikal it is often better to move the component to place in a empty space to see clear where you set your join origin.

No real problem, I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything.

Jan

[TrippyLighting]

An as-built joint it really the best solution here and in any situation where components are created in place.

You can make an as-built revolute joint or really any joint option is available as as-built joint.

Again, as long as the components are created in place by the patten command ( o so I assume) that works fine. Some folks use the move, or align tool to move components into pace and then use the as-built joint. That is not advisable, because you cannot delete the position capture features that you have to create.

IF these individual cylinders would not have to revolve a single rigid group joint to the seed instance would do the trick ... assuming that the seed instance has been properly joined.

As such I would urge you to look at if it is really necessary that these cylinder s rotate in the CAD design (not in reality).

[janus2]

Hello MichaelT!

RTFM is always helpful advice. And so simple. It always fits.

But I did my homework. I can do what I want to do. But I am never satisfied and always looking for a better solution.

One day I might reach your level of divine enlightenment. Until then I will continue to ask questions here in the forum.

Have a nice day
Jan

[TrippyLighting]

---

@janus2 wrote:

Hello MichaelT!

RTFM is always helpful advice. And so simple. It always fits.

---

No it does not always fit and does not in this case. 

But very often it does and I can see where @MichaelT_123 is coming from.

So if everyone can just please relax and have some coffee and donuts  (like this guy) that would probably help 😉

[janus2]

Hello Peter!

As such I would urge you to look at if it is really necessary that these cylinder s rotate in the CAD design (not in reality).

That's a valid question.In most cases it is not necessary.

But I try to design an old calculating machine from the year 1700! So I do some (manual and motion link) simulation to see if all gear wheels, levers, springs etc. fit into each other. So I need this revolute join at this time in development.

As I said before: No real problem, I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything.

Thanks for your help

Jan

[MichaelT_123]

All The Best Mr Jan in F360 enlightenment.

With Regards

MichaelT

[janus2]

I think I've found a solution!

The cylinder was just an example. In reality it is an assembly. Now I have inserted a dummy element into the assembly. All other components can now revolve around this dummy element inside the assembly.

If I now use copy pattern for the positioning of the assemblies and then make a rigid group of the dummy elements, each Assembly can rotate in place.😁

I include a small test design if someone is interested.

Jan

[MichaelT_123]

Hi Mr Jan,

I have to admit, it was the implementation of KKPP workflow strategy celebrated with the utmost devotion…

even considering The History Of CADMen.

If it was not a miracle, what was it? No JOs in sight!

Keep it for the next X thousands of years,… in moderation, of course.

Sincerely

MichaelT

[MoshiurRashid]

As built join it is...

Have a try

[janus2]

As build Join works as well. But I have to do it on every instance of the copied components.

With rigid group I can select all at once.

Thanks

Jan

[janus2]

Hello, Michael!

You may have noticed that English is not my mother tongue.
So I have trouble understanding your message. I understand the words but not the meaning.

What is KKPP-Workflow?

But as a start into the week I assume it was meant positively.

I wish you a good start into the week.
Jan

[MichaelT_123]

Absolutely positively...

Read the context of my previous post.

It means: Kit-Kat - PrincePolo break.

Google it you do not know brands.

'Have a break, have a Kit-Kat'  - It is the brand's add/slogan.

I have tossed PrincePolo, which is equally good, if not better. (you might know it )

In more elaborate, verbose description It (supposed) to mean:

If you are struggling with some problem, have a break, think about it deeper, do not rush if you are not ready.

Regards

MichaelT